Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety
Date: 2017-10-05 22:34:41
Message-ID: 20171005223441.cwjtedpuwjmhivhn@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2017-10-05 17:31:07 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > > vfork() is widely demonized, but it's actually quite superior
> > > (performance-wise) to fork() when all you want to do is exec-or-exit
> > > since no page copying (COW or otherwise) needs be done when using
> > > vfork().
> >
> > Not on linux, at least not as of a year or two back.
>
> glibc has it. Other Linux C libraries might also; I've not checked them
> all.

It has it, but it's not more efficient.

> > I do think it'd be good to move more towards threads, but not at all for
> > the reasons mentioned here.
>
> You don't think eliminating a large difference between handling of WIN32
> vs. POSIX is a good reason?

I seems like you'd not really get a much reduced set of differences,
just a *different* set of differences. After investing time.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nico Williams 2017-10-05 22:39:51 Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety
Previous Message Nico Williams 2017-10-05 22:31:07 Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety